About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
MSNBC 5
MSNBCW 5
CSPAN 2
CSPAN2 1
LANGUAGE
English 16
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)
. senate majority leader harry reid cuttings off debate, calling for lawmakers to make a decision. now republicans are threatening to block that vote saying they have some unanswered questions. a few of them spoke with our mike emanuel, chief congressional correspondent. first start off with what harry reid, the top democrat in the senate is saying about all this. this morning he was quite emotional about what is going on. till us about that. >> reporter: jenna, that's right. harry reid has 55 democrats in the senate who would vote to move forward with the chuck hagel nomination, confirmation process. the bottom line though he needs 60. so he needs five republicans to come along to get past that procedural hurdle. he doesn't have those five. so harry reid is frustrated. >> mr. president, in less than two hours our country will be without a secretary of defense at a time when we have a war going on in afghanistan, and about 70,000 troops there. we have a nuclear weapon was detonated in north korea. >> reporter: a nuclear test was done in north korea and 66,000 troops in afghanistan but
." do you remember when the top democrat in the senate, harry reid, declared just a few weeks ago the democrats would not change the rules in the senate? remember that? wouldn't change the rules to stop senate republicans from abusing the process there. harry reid decided he would just instead make a handshake deal with the republicans' top senator, mitch mcconnell. he said he was satisfied with the republicans just agreeing to be more reasonable on issues like this. remember? they wouldn't change the filibuster rules. they would just agree as gentlemen that the republicans would curtail the excesses of filibustering everything and effectively ruling from the minority. democrats decided to not change the rules on the filibuster and just make that agreement with the republicans instead. they said, you know, at a minimum this will at least improve the confirmation process for the administration's nominees. how is that working out now? just a couple of weeks later. how's that gentleman's agreement going? now that we've just had a filibuster of a cabinet nominee for the first time in
's confirmation for defense secretary, but this morning harry reid does in the have the 60 votes to overcome a republican filibuster. he needs five republican votes but so far he only has two, mike johanns of nebraska and thad cochrane of mississippi. so he took his colleagues to task in his own soft-spoken way. >> it's tragic that they've decided to filibuster this qualified nominee. it is really unfortunate. >> michael: you know, reid is of course not totally off the hook. he didn't push filibuster reform through earlier this year even though it looked like he had the chance to do so. but the ludicrous part of this whole thing is the reason why republicans are giving for opposing hagel is bengahzi. that this was a cover up after the ambassador was killed. they're alleging that chuck hagel was involved. not only is that a stretch but chuck hagel oversee something like this. they dignified the response. after both lindsey graham and john mccain said they were largely satisfied according to the hill, but they still wanted to push the hagueel vote back. in reality it's not like they actually c
at the beginning of the day we didn't think that harry reid would get any republican votes, and he's actuall
at the beginning of the day we didn't think that harry reid would get any republican votes, and he's actually secured quite a few. >> actually not a surprise. not a surprise because most republicans will say a president has the right to choose his own nominees. they believe that so that when the president is from their party, that holds true. what happened here is that hagel's performance at his hearing and some of the questions that have come up, some of the unanswered questions, have dragged that out. there are two factions of republicans who have slowed this down. a group focused solely on hagel wanting more information and that includes the new texas senator ted cruz who has been particularly critical of hagel in raising questions about his ties to foreign groups that might have provided him some salary during the years sips he left the senate. that's been very harsh questioning. on the other hand, there was a small faction of mccain, graham, and ayotte, who wanted more information about benghazi. i just spoke to them, and they said they believe that taking the stand was very effective. t
with the nra is harry reid. i don't know if he's still a member, he was a member at one point. i wonder if you characterize the nra relationship with harry reid own the years and also talk about what you have communicated about over the past few weeks with the man who will decide on whether a gun restriction law is bill is brought to the floor of the senate. >> i'm not our lobbyist. any recent conversations with senator reid would not be really within my -- i have not personally talked to senator reid. we had a relatively friendly relationship with the senator over time. we did not endorse him for re-election. we didn't endorse his opponent either. we supported him at the primary level last time. he has been, when firearms legislation has not been the priority of his president, he's a partisan leader, she's been responsive to constituents in nevada and has been relatively friendly on second amendment issues. he's under incredible pressure right now. he's got, as any member of congress or senator does, he has his own beliefs. he has the views and the demands of his constituents on the one hand,
united, and they're going home. i am sure we can get harry reid, he will come back as the speaker will join with us in supporting the plan that the house and senate democrats and the president supports to avoid the sequester and avoid 750,000 americans losing their jobs. we will do it. they put a plan on their table, we put a plan on the table, the house has put zero plans on the table. >> they always talk about what they did in the last congress. those bills are gone. they keep pointing to them as if somehow magically they are going to be resurrected. if they want to resurrect them, put them on the floor and let's vote. >> it is often talked about, sequestration, and we have heard so much about the sequester. will you lay out areas that are most important to democrats that the sequester will impact? >> i will defer to our budget chair because he has worked with all of our caucus on this, but i know other members will be talking about it, and that is where the rubber meets the road in the appropriations committee. that we say, since you mentioned education, when they talk about cu
and need more time. it was harry reid who called this vote as sort of an attempt to call their bluff saying this is enough, you're delaying this for no reason but i don't think this is going to help the republicans' image especially when they're going around saying we're not actually trying to stop this nomination. we're not actually filibustering, so what are they doing? i think especially for people who are sick of the sort of washington games, this isn't a good image for them. >> jake, let's talk about this break that congress is on. house speaker nancy pelosi blamed republicans for not using this time more productively. take a listen. >> they manufactured the crisis and instead of having us try to avert that crisis they go on a nine-day recess. why? ? why? people outside the congress are saying no deal, no break. >> why, jake, why? >> nancy pelosi did similar things when she had control but that simplifies a complicated issue. democrats and republicans and the president are miles apart when it comes to averting the sequester. democrats want to raise taxes. republicans say they don't wan
, that harry reid and his pals are supposed to pass one every year. who is doing the investigation for that? host: before we let you go, what do you think about this report that sigtarp put out specifically looking at executive pay at bail out companies? caller: of course it is disgusting. but the senate gets paid for doing nothing. i wonder where they get the idea from? -- raise an important point. anybody who tries to rip off -- guest: you raise an important point. anybody tries to rip out -- representative off the taxpayer is reprehensible. we are coming out very aggressive on anyone in that investigation. those who may be thinking about that or doing that now should take a warning by the fact we are sending people to jail. host: christy romero is special investigator for tarp -- sigtarp for short. >> a look at the automatic spending cuts scheduled to take effect march 1. half the cuts are from the pentagon. we will discuss that with ray locker. and a conversation about the use of lethal force against suspected terrorists. then we will talk about the 22 anniversary of the family and medi
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)